Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am supportive of putting expressly into the legislation a requirement that any recommendation should be based on merit. That is extremely important. The objective of every person in this room is to ensure that those appointed to the Bench get there because of their ability and the type of judge that they will be rather than any political affiliation, friendship or other connection that they may have. We all want the best people to be made judges.

It is interesting that Deputy Ó Laoghaire mentioned Dr. Patrick O'Brien who has done a lot of research in the area of how they have changed the system in England. I met Dr. O'Brien as well. He made an interesting point about the emphasis of the merit principle in England and Wales at present. He stated that one of the consequences of having a completely autonomous body that recommends people based solely on merit is that one gets a lot of people who are similar being appointed. He stated that one gets a lot of highly intelligent people who got firsts in Oxbridge being recommended because on the principle of merit they appear to be come out on top.

However, that has a consequential downside in terms of how the Judiciary must reflect diversity in society and shows where the advantage lies with Government. A Government does not operate the same way as a statutory body that must operate on the basis of merit. A Government will take into account diversity. Many appointments in recent times recognise that more women must be appointed to the Bench. That is a benefit. It is important to link merit and diversity together. In section 7, as it stands, there is reference to how appointments should be based on merit and how they should reflect diversity. My only problem with Deputy Ó Laoghaire's amendment is that, if passed, it will have the effect of knocking out my amendment No. 20, although I know that was not his intention.

Amendment No. 20, which was tabled by me and Deputy Jack Chambers, requires that when judges are being recommended by this body, consideration will be given to ensuring the objective that there is proficiency in the Irish language among members of the Judiciary, which is a practical problem at present. Every person is entitled to have his or her case heard in Irish, whether in the District Court, Circuit Court, High Court or on appeal. It is difficult enough to converse in Irish but running a case in Irish is extremely difficult. I could not do it. However, it is important that we have judges with proficiency in the Irish language so that those who want to exercise the constitutional right to have their case heard through Irish can do so.

On a number of occasions judges have to come down from higher courts to hear cases and three judges who are proficient in the Irish language are needed to hear an appeal in the Court of Appeal. Previous Governments have not given sufficient recognition to this factor but it is now an issue - not a problem - for the courts. It is important that this body recognises, when recommending people, that it must consider that proficiency in a court. For instance, if someone wants to have his or her appeal heard through Irish, we have to ensure that there are three judges on either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court who can hear such cases. This amendment would knock out my amendment No. 20. However, I will not oppose Deputy Ó Laoghaire's amendment because I agree with the principle of it. I also think Deputy Clare Daly's amendments No. 17 and 19 and perhaps amendment No. 21 - I do not know if it is in this grouping - achieve the objective Deputy Ó Laoghaire is seeking to achieve.